DOCSLIB.ORG

Is a Ne Exeat Right a “Right of Custody” Under the Hague Convention? Name Redacted Legislative Attorney

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Is a Ne Exeat Right a “Right of Custody” Under the Hague Convention? Name Redacted Legislative Attorney Abbott v. Abbott: Is a Ne Exeat Right a “Right of Custody” Under the Hague Convention? name redacted Legislative Attorney March 4, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R41094 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Abbott v. Abbott: Is a Ne Exeat Right a “Right of Custody” Under the Hague Convention? Summary International child custody disputes figure to increase in frequency as the global society becomes more integrated and mobile. A child custody dispute between two parents can become a diplomatic imbroglio between two countries. Thus in 2000, Members of Congress and Vice President Al Gore backed legislation to grant Cuban refugee Elian Gonzalez permanent residency status, even after President Fidel Castro demanded the boy’s return. More recently, in the 111th Congress, both houses passed resolutions (S.Res. 37 and H.R. 125) calling on the Brazilian government to return Sean Goldman, the son of New Jersey resident David Goldman, to the United States. In the case of the Goldman family, the father’s legal argument for return was based on the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“Hague Convention”). This treaty was entered into force in the United States in 1988, and has since been the principal mechanism for enforcing parental rights in international custody disputes. However, judicial interpretation of certain Hague Convention provisions has been inconsistent among federal Circuit Courts of Appeals. The lives of one British-American family—the Abbotts—and the lives of families similarly situated may be affected by how the United States Supreme Court resolves this circuit split in Abbott v. Abbott. In this case, the Court will determine whether a ne exeat, or “no exit” order granting one parent the right to veto another parent’s decision to remove their child from his or her home country is a “right of custody” under the Hague Convention. Such a determination is necessary to determine the Convention’s applicability, as it only provides for a child’s return to the country which issued the ne exeat order if the removal was “wrongful” and in breach of “rights of custody.” This report discusses the circuit split on the treaty interpretation issue, the arguments made before the Supreme Court in Abbott, and the significance of the case. Congressional Research Service Abbott v. Abbott: Is a Ne Exeat Right a “Right of Custody” Under the Hague Convention? Contents Background ................................................................................................................................1 Hague Convention ......................................................................................................................1 Abbott v. Abbott...........................................................................................................................2 District Court Opinion...........................................................................................................3 Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion..................................................................................4 The Second Circuit Opinion: Croll v. Croll..................................................................................4 The Croll Court’s Textual Analysis of the Hague Convention ................................................4 Practical Considerations and Extratextual Sources in Croll....................................................5 Dissenting Opinion ...............................................................................................................6 The Eleventh Circuit Opinion: Furnes v. Reeves..........................................................................7 Arguments Before the U.S. Supreme Court .................................................................................7 Significance of Supreme Court’s Decision...................................................................................9 Contacts Author Contact Information ........................................................................................................9 Congressional Research Service Abbott v. Abbott: Is a Ne Exeat Right a “Right of Custody” Under the Hague Convention? Background International child custody disputes figure to increase in frequency as the global society becomes more integrated and mobile. What is more, a child custody dispute between two parents can become a diplomatic imbroglio between two countries. In Abbott v. Abbott1 the U.S. Supreme Court will address an issue that has divided the Circuit Courts of Appeals: Whether a ne exeat right2 is a “right of custody” for purposes of the Hague Convention? If so, parents with a ne exeat right can demand the return of their child “wrongfully” taken from the family’s home country. In September 2008, the Fifth Circuit ruled that a ne exeat right is not a “right of custody” and therefore the removal of a child in violation of ne exeat order is not “wrongful.”3 The Supreme Court is now confronted with a four-to-one circuit split: the Second, Ninth, Fourth, and now Fifth Circuits have ruled that a ne exeat right is not a “right of custody,”4 while the Eleventh Circuit has reached the opposite conclusion.5 Hague Convention The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“Hague Convention”)6 protects children from wrongful removal across international borders and provides procedures to aid in their safe return. While the Convention has been the principal mechanism for enforcing the return of abducted children to the United States, it is not without limitations. First, its procedures are inapplicable and/or unenforceable in nonsignatory nations. Second, it does not act as an extradition treaty, nor does it purport to adjudicate the merits of a custody dispute.7 It is merely a civil remedy8 designed to preserve the status quo by facilitating the return of an abducted child to the country of his or her “habitual residence” and allowing the judicial authorities in that country to adjudicate the merits of a custody dispute. As such, the proceeding is brought in the country to which the child was abducted or in which the child is retained.9 1 Abbott v. Abbott, 542 F.3d 1081 (5th Cir. 2008), cert. granted, 129 S. Ct. 2859 (2009). 2 A ne exeat right is the right of one parent to veto another parent’s decision to remove their child from their home country. Abbott, 542 F.3d at 1082. The right can be conferred by a judicial order or by statute, or both. See id. 3 Abbott, 542 F.3d at 1082. 4 Croll v. Croll, 229 F.3d 133 (2d Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 949 (2001); Gonzales v. Guiterrez; 11 F.3d 942 (9th Cir. 2002); Fawcett v. McRoberts, 326 F.3d 491 (4th Cir. 2003). 5 Furnes v. Reeves, 362 F.3d 702 (11th Cir.) cert. denied, 543 U.S. 978 (2004). 6 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects International Child Abduction, 51 Fed. Reg. 10,494 (Mar. 26, 1986). 7 Article 19 of the Hague Convention states that “[a] decision under this Convention concerning the return of the child shall not be taken as a determination on the merits of any custody issue.” Id., art. 19, at 10,503. 8 The Hague Convention is a “private civil legal mechanism,” and as such, “the parents, not the governments are parties to the legal action.” Bureau of Consular Affairs, U.S. Dep’t of State, Pub. No. 10489, International Parental Child Abduction 9 (1997). 9 When a child of a custodial parent in another country is abducted to the United States, the parent has the option of asking the court in the jurisdiction in which the child is found to enforce the foreign custody degree. Congressional Research Service 1 Abbott v. Abbott: Is a Ne Exeat Right a “Right of Custody” Under the Hague Convention? Although domestic relations involve issues typically governed by state law, the federal statute implementing the Hague Convention explicitly confers jurisdiction on the federal courts.10 Procedures and remedies available under the Convention differ depending on the parental rights infringed. Under Article 3 of the Hague Convention, the removal of a child is “wrongful” when “it is in breach of rights of custody attributed to a person, an institution or any other body, either jointly or alone, under the law of the State in which the child was habitually resident immediately before the removal or retention;” and “at the time of removal or retention those rights were actually exercised, either jointly or alone, or would have been so exercised but for the removal or retention.”11 Thus, there are two elements to a claim that the child’s removal was “wrongful” under Article 3: (1) the removal was in breach of “rights of custody”; and (2) those rights were “actually exercised” at the time of the removal, or would have been but for the removal. Article 5 in turn defines “rights of custody,” and distinguishes those rights from “rights of access”: (a) “rights of custody” shall include rights relating to the care of the person of the child and, in particular, the right to determine the child’s place of residence; (b) “rights of access” shall include the right to take a child for a limited period of time to a place other than the child’s habitual residence.12 Critically, the treaty provides for the return of the child only if a parent’s custody rights have been violated.13 Parents deprived of their rights of access have the less robust remedy provided for in Article 21 of “mak[ing] arrangements” with the Department of State to secure effective exercise of their rights.14 Thus, at the heart of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UK Schools Directory 2020/21 the UK BOARDING SCHOOLS SPECIALIST for HM FORCES FAMILIES
    FREE UK Schools Directory 2020/21 THE UK BOARDING SCHOOLS SPECIALIST FOR HM FORCES FAMILIES www.andersoneducation.co.uk UK SCHOOLS DIRECTORY 2020/21 1 Welcome to the latest Contents UK Schools Directory 4 Help & advice for HM Forces families... 8 Memories Choosing a boarding school is a daunting task, 20 London and our FREE impartial help and advice is unique, South East schools personal and tailored to the individual needs 25 South and West of each child and their family. schools For those parents with little experience of boarding schools 38 Central schools it can be a daunting prospect; most rely on friends and family 46 Eastern schools for help and advice. Each child is different and each school is different. With a little help from the experts you can find that 52 Northern schools perfect place where your child will blossom and grow to his or her full potential. 56 Scottish schools The UK Schools Directory has been designed specifically with 57 Northern Ireland the Forces family in mind and is an excellent starting point schools including information on some of the UK's many excellent boarding schools plus personal experiences from Forces, RAF, 58 School listing and Naval and FCO families. We sincerely hope that you will find regional map this Directory helpful and informative. Free copies are available from the HIVE near you or as a download on our website www.andersoneducation.co.uk Please contact us by completing an Enquiry Form via our website at www.andersoneducation.co.uk, email or telephone. We would EVERYONE HAS A STORY be delighted to offer you our FREE help and guidance, every step of the way, until you have secured a boarding school place.
    [Show full text]
  • STUDY of DISCRIMINATION in RESPECT of the RIGHT of EVERYONE to LEA VE ANY COUNTRY, INCLUDING HIS OWN, and to RETURN to HIS COUNTRY by Jose D
    STUDY OF DISCRIMINATION IN RESPECT OF THE RIGHT OF EVERYONE TO LEA VE ANY COUNTRY, INCLUDING HIS OWN, AND TO RETURN TO HIS COUNTRY by Jose D. lngles Special Rapporteur of the Sub.Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities UNITED NATIONS New York, 1963 ,">' J The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatso­ ever on the part of the Secretariat of the Ul1ited Nations concerning the legal status of any country or territory or of its authorities, or concern­ ing the delimitation of its frontiers. * >I< * Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document. E/CNA/Sub.2/229/Rev.l , UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION NOTE The Study of Discrimination in Respect of the Right of Everyone to Leave any Country, Including His Own, and to Return to His Country, is the fourth of a series of studies undertaken by the Sub­ Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minori­ ties with the authorization of the Commission on Human Rights and the Economic and Social Council. A Study of Discrimination in Edu­ cation, the first of the series, was published in 1957 (Sales No.: 57. XIV.3), the Study of Discrimination in the Matter of Religious Rights and Practices, the second of the series, was published in 1960 (Sales No.: 60.XIV.2), and the Study of Discrimination in the Matter of Political Rights, the third of the series, was published in 1963 (Sales No.: 63.XIV.2).
    [Show full text]
  • H 955 Great Britain
    Great Britain H 955 BACKGROUND: The heading Great Britain is used in both descriptive and subject cataloging as the conventional form for the United Kingdom, which comprises England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. This instruction sheet describes the usage of Great Britain, in contrast to England, as a subject heading. It also describes the usage of Great Britain, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales as geographic subdivisions. 1. Great Britain vs. England as a subject heading. In general assign the subject heading Great Britain, with topical and/or form subdivisions, as appropriate, to works about the United Kingdom as a whole. Assign England, with appropriate subdivision(s), to works limited to that country. Exception: Do not use the subdivisions BHistory or BPolitics and government under England. For a work on the history, politics, or government of England, assign the heading Great Britain, subdivided as required for the work. References in the subject authority file reflect this practice. Use the subdivision BForeign relations under England only in the restricted sense described in the scope note under EnglandBForeign relations in the subject authority file. 2. Geographic subdivision. a. Great Britain. Assign Great Britain directly after topics for works that discuss the topic in relation to Great Britain as a whole. Example: Title: History of the British theatre. 650 #0 $a Theater $z Great Britain $x History. b. England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales. Assign England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, or Wales directly after topics for works that limit their discussion to the topic in relation to one of the four constituent countries of Great Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Headteacher What a Great Start to the New Academic Year Here at the College
    Pride ● Passion ● Positivity September Exeat Edition | Edition 12 Welcome from the Headteacher What a great start to the new academic year here at the College. I have met with all of our new Year 7 and Year 12 students; they are wonderful groups of young people who are quickly settling into life at the College and embracing all that we have to offer in their lessons and Wymondham Life activities. We have some new members of the Senior Leadership Team (SLT) this year and some roles have also changed. We have included short biographies of the SLT in this edition of the Lion so that you can be fully up to date with who is who. The old Student Service building has now been completely demolished and the foundations are currently being constructed for the new Peter Rout Centre. This will house the Maths and SEND departments and will have a lecture theatre for meetings and talks. We will very quickly see the building take shape over the coming few months. The exams results that were published in the summer, once again, place us as one of the highest performing schools in the country. Our GCSE results rose from 83% to 86% (English and Maths 4+) and the progress made by our Year 13 students in their A Level exams was exceptional with an average point score that is the highest in the College’s history – a huge well done to our students and staff. One final announcement; we do have some capacity for current day students to become day boarders.
    [Show full text]
  • Estimates of Trade Between Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England
    UK Interregional Trade Estimation: Estimates of trade between Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England Alastair Greig, Mairi Spowage and Graeme Roy ESCoE Discussion Paper 2020-09 June 2020 ISSN 2515-4664 UK Interregional Trade Estimation: Estimates of trade between Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England Alastair Greig, Mairi Spowage and Graeme Roy ESCoE Discussion Paper No. 2020-09 June 2020 Abstract In the UK, there is major economic change such as Brexit on the horizon. The impact of such change is likely to vary across UK regions. There is also a growing demand for improved regional economic analysis to help inform devolution and City Deal-type policymaking. Despite these concerns, there are no comprehensive national statistics on interregional trade in the UK. This paper fills this gap, proposing a framework for estimating interregional trade between the devolved nations of the UK: England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. We explain where gaps exist in the current UK data landscape and suggests various ways in which these could be addressed. We then apply our framework using currently available data, presenting initial results for trade between the 4 nations of the UK in 2015. Recommendations for future work are also presented, including the need to evaluate current methods for collecting trade information within the UK. Keywords: Interregional Trade Flows, Regional Supply Use Tables, Trade Surveys, Origin Destination Data JEL classification: F15, F17, R12 Mairi Spowage, Fraser of Allander Institute, University of Strathclyde, [email protected] and Greame Roy, Fraser of Allander Institute, University of Strathclyde, [email protected]. Published by: Economic Statistics Centre of Excellence National Institute of Economic and Social Research 2 Dean Trench St London SW1P 3HE United Kingdom www.escoe.ac.uk ESCoE Discussion Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate.
    [Show full text]
  • Ultra X 125 England Mandatory Kit List the Following Equipment Is Required by Race Rules: Must Be Carried at All Times During the Race: to Be Left at Camp: 1
    ULTRA X 125 ENGLAND MANDATORY KIT LIST THE FOLLOWING EQUIPMENT IS REQUIRED BY RACE RULES: MUST BE CARRIED AT ALL TIMES DURING THE RACE: TO BE LEFT AT CAMP: 1. Suitable running shoes 17. Minimum of 2,000 kcal food per 2. Suitable running socks day (dehydrated or freeze dried 3. Running pack food is highly recommended) 4. Hydration system with capacity for 18. A warm jacket (for the evenings) minimum 1 litre of fluid 19. Sleeping bag (8-14°C at night) 5. A durable water repellent and windproof 20. Camping equipment jacket with taped seams 6. Protective hat/cap 7. Buf/scarf or similar to cover your nose HIGHLY RECOMMENDED: and mouth • Running poles 8. High quality head torch with spare • Sunglasses batteries (red light capability • Electrolyte solutions recommended) • Spork or similar eating utensils 9. Whistle • Pillow 10. Watch (GPS advised but not mandatory) • Roll mat or similar 11. Sun block (minimum strength factor 30, • Portable charger for watch/phone (there although 50+ is recommended) is no access to electricity during the race) 12. Personal basic frst aid kit, including: four • Baby wipes, one pack of 60-100 (consider safety pins, cleansing wipes, antiseptic carrying whilst running for toilet stops) spray or cream, plasters • Shoes for camp (flip flops or similar) 13. Survival bag (not blanket) • Normal clothes and toiletries for pre/ 14. Any medication required post-race and for travelling 15. Minimum of 800 kcal food reserve • Local currency (British Pound Sterling) 16. Fully charged smartphone for food and drinks at the finish line Feel free to bring additional supplies, equipment, or personal items.
    [Show full text]
  • Controversial Ne Exeat Clause Grants Custodial Power Under Abbott V
    Mercer Law Review Volume 62 Number 2 Articles Edition Article 14 3-2011 The Last Rights: Controversial Ne Exeat Clause Grants Custodial Power Under Abbott v. Abbott Danielle L. Brewer Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr Part of the Family Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Brewer, Danielle L. (2011) "The Last Rights: Controversial Ne Exeat Clause Grants Custodial Power Under Abbott v. Abbott," Mercer Law Review: Vol. 62 : No. 2 , Article 14. Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr/vol62/iss2/14 This Casenote is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Mercer Law School Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mercer Law Review by an authorized editor of Mercer Law School Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Casenote The Last Rights: Controversial Ne Exeat Clause Grants Custodial Power Under Abbott v. Abbott I. INTRODUCTION The weight to be assigned to the laws and practices of foreign legal systems in the analysis of international agreements and domestic statutory disputes has long been a topic of debate in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the United States government.' On 1. Compare Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304, 348 (2002) (Scalia, J., dissenting) (alterations in original) (quoting Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815, 868 n.4 (1988) (Scalia, J., dissenting)) (internal quotation marks omitted) ("We must never forget that it is a Constitution for the United States of America that we are expounding. ... [W]here there is not first a settled consensus among our own people, the views of other nations, however enlightened the Justices of this Court may think them to be, cannot be imposed upon Americans through the Constitution."), with Printz v.
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural Facts: England Regional Profiles
    Defra statistics: Agricultural facts – South West (commercial holdings at June 2019 (unless stated) The South West region comprises Cornwall & Isles of Scilly, Devon, Somerset, Dorset, Wiltshire, Gloucestershire and Bristol / Bath area. Dartmoor and Exmoor National Parks are within the region. For the South West region: Total Income from Farming increased by 46% between 2015 and 2019 to £644 million. The biggest contributors to the value of the output (£4.1 billion), which were milk (£1,105 million), plants and flowers (£545 million), cattle for meat (£357 million) and poultry meat (£304 million), together accounting for 57%. (Sourced from Defra Aggregate agricultural accounts) In the South West the average farm size in 2019 was 68 hectares. This is smaller than the English average of 87 hectares. Predominant farm types in the South West region in 2019 were Grazing Livestock farms which accounted for 36% of farmed area in the region, Cereals farms and Dairy farms which covered an additional 20% and 18% of farmed area each. Land Labour South West England South West England Total farmed area (thousand 1,789 9,206 Total Labour(a) hectares People: 64,610 306,374 Average farm size (hectares) 68 87 Per farm(b) 2.5 2.9 % of farmed area that is: Regular workers Rented (for at least 1 year) 31% 33% People: 13,406 68,962 Arable area(a) 41% 52% Per farm(b) 0.5 0.6 Permanent pasture 48% 36% Casual workers Severely Disadvantaged Area 7% 13% People: 5,455 45,843 (a) Includes arable crops, uncropped arable land and Per farm(b) 0.2 0.4 temporary grass.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonprofit Law in England & Wales
    NONPROFIT LAW IN ENGLAND & WALES Current as of August 2020 This section describes the legal framework governing nonprofit organizations (also known as non-governmental organizations or NGOs) in England & Wales, and includes translations of legislative provisions relevant for a foundation or advisor undertaking an equivalency determination of a foreign grantee under IRS Revenue Procedure 92-94. These reports have been prepared by the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL). Please direct corrections and comments to Lily Liu. We include hyperlinks to the following information, to the extent available: • Longer country reports analyzing various aspects of local legislation; and • Texts of local laws that affect the decision whether or not to qualify a grantee (generally in translation, although ICNL and the Council cannot warrant the accuracy of any translation; in addition, legislative excerpts were selected by in-country contacts, and ICNL and the Council cannot warrant that all relevant provisions have been translated). Table of Contents I. Summary A. Types of Organizations B. Tax Laws II. Applicable Laws III. Relevant Legal Forms A. General Legal Forms B. Public Benefit Status IV. Specific Questions Regarding Local Law A. Inurement B. Proprietary Interest C. Dissolution D. Activities E. Political Activities F. Discrimination G. Control of Organization V. Tax Laws A. Tax Exemptions B. Incentives for Philanthropy C. Value Added Tax D. Property Tax E. Other Tax Benefits F. Double Tax Treaty VI. Knowledgeable Contacts I. SUMMARY This report is limited to England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland, the other two components of the United Kingdom, have separate legal systems. In the past, their provisions for regulating charities have differed significantly, but Scotland and Northern Ireland both now have similar regulatory regimes.
    [Show full text]
  • Or by Rea Unlawful Place, Pretending Damage Done By
    [ 351 ] N. NAT NaCELLA, A skiff or boat. Mat. Paris. Char- NACKA, NACTA, A small ship, yacht, or transport vessel. tular Abbat. Rading. MS. fol. 51. the Sax. The NAM, or NAAM, namium; from niman, capere.j moveable Lawful Naam, taking or distraining another man's goods. to the value of the which is a reasonable distress, proportionable or thing distrained for, was antiently called either vif or mort, quick and it is when one dead, as it consisted of dead or quick chattels; or rea takes another man's beasts damage-feasant, in his ground; by of of an son of some contract made, as for default payment annuity, There is also it shall be lawful to distrain in such or such lands, &c. Home's lib. 2. See a Naam unlawful mentioned in our books. Mirror, Gloss, and this title Replevin: Leg. Canut. e. 18: Sjielm. Dictionary, Namium. and post. > NAMATION, namatio.~) A taking or distraining; and in Scotland Hen. 2. See it is used for impounding: Namatus, distrained. Charta, Vetitum Namium, and Withernam. which is known NAME, nomen, Fr. nosme or nomJ] By any person and and or called. There is a name of persons, bodies politic, places; &c. In some cases a of baptism and surname; also names of dignity, but it is not so of a n the name by reputation is sufficient; thing, 11 21: 6 65: 4 Rep. matter and substance be not right. Rep. Rep. See Ed. 170. What foundation will support a name by reputation, Misnomer. Raym. 301, 304: and this Dictionary, title of NAMIUM VETITUM, An unjust taking the cattle another, done by and driving them to an unlawful place, pretending damage demand satisfaction them.
    [Show full text]
  • England & Wales
    Informal relationships – ENGLAND & WALES NATIONAL REPORT: ENGLAND & WALES Prof. Anna Barlow Prof. Nigel Lowe January 2015 A. General 1. What kinds of formal relationships between a couple (e.g. different/same-sex marriage, different/same-sex registered partnership, etc.) are regulated by legislation? Briefly indicate the current legislation. In England and Wales, the following formal couple relationships are recognised and their formation is governed by legislation which sets out the formalities and requirements for: - Heterosexual marriage – English Marriage Act 1949 - Same-sex marriage – English Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Act 2013 which further amends English Marriage Act 1949 - Registered and exclusively same-sex Civil Partnership – English Civil Partnership Act 2004 - Divorce and nullity of all marriages is governed by the English Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 Part I. - Dissolution and nullity of civil partnerships is governed by Chapter 2 of the English Civil Partnership Act 2004.1 2. To what extent, if at all, are informal relationships between a couple regulated by specific legislative provisions? Where applicable, briefly indicate the current specific legislation. Are there circumstances (e.g. the existence of a marriage or registered partnership with another person, a partner’s minority) which disqualify the couple? Informal cohabiting relationships between both different and same-sex couples are recognised in a number of legal contexts but on a piecemeal basis, with different definitions of who will be recognised as cohabiting applying in different situations and to different degrees in England and Wales. Providing the couple are each over 16 years of age (the age of consent to sexual intercourse), they will normally be able to access remedies available to cohabitants unless there is a more general reason for not permitting this (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Social Security Rights in United Kingdom
    Your social security rights in the United Kingdom European Commission Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Your social security rights in the United Kingdom The information provided in this guide has been drafted and updated in close collaboration with the national correspondents of the Mutual Information System on Social Protection (MISSOC). The MISSOC-Network, coordinated since 1990 by the European Commission, comprises up to two official representatives of the public administrations of 31 European countries (the 27 EU Member States, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Iceland). MISSOC produces regularly updated information and analyses which are mainly used by officials, researchers and people moving within Europe. More information on the MISSOC network is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=815 This guide does not provide an exhaustive description of the social security arrangements applicable in this country. For more detailed information on social security in this and other European countries, please refer to the MISSOC Comparative Tables, the MISSOC Charts and Descriptions of the Organisation of Social Protection and to the MISSOC Annex on Social Protection for the Self-employed, all available at the abovementioned link. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission may be held responsible for the use that may be made of the information contained in this publication. © European Union, 2011 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. 2 December 2010 European Commission Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Your social security rights in the United Kingdom Chapter I: Introduction, organisation and financing.....................................................5 Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 5 Organisation of social protection...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]